4 ms·
So the corporation is still the symptom. What we should be doing is insulating the government from outside influence.
by joelrunyon 9y ago
So the corporation is still the symptom.
What we should be doing is insulating the government from outside influence.
- danharaj 9y agoA government insulated from outside influence no longer governs.
- dmix 9y agoJust because politicians stop creating opportunities for mega-corps and wealthy individuals to gain unfair advantages in the economy doesn't stop them from writing all legislation. Corporations/wealthy individuals can't exploit power which doesn't exist. Adding more complexity and protections to prevent this has repeatedly failed and usually just creates more loopholes, the solution is simplification of new laws and reduction of old poorly written laws (adding more complexity has historically been a one way street in modern government: https://i.imgur.com/pe64eNd.png https://i.imgur.com/pe64eNd.png). And if lawmakers can't write regulations, legislation, or tax policy which doesn't give particular people/organizations an advantage, by side effect or directly, then they shouldn't write them at all - or just accept that there will be people who sidestep it. But it's ridiculous to say this will prevent politicians from governing. Yes, it will limit the types of legislation and force them to consider the full implications, but that's a good thing. This is why people support things like basic income and flat tax. Removing complexity, bureaucracy, and direct government involvement in picking winners/losers. Everyone knows the devil is in the details when you're trying to circumvent a system or take advantage of it.
- TeMPOraL 9y agoTangential: interesting how, through using a weird vertical scale, the image you linked to weakens its own point. I suppose if the Y axis was consistent, it wouldn't look as if tax law expansion slowed down significantly in recent times.
- dmix 9y agoAgreed, I hate logarithmic graphs, as they can be highly manipulative, but this one was even worse as it would be more persuasive if it didn't oddly divide the years. I did in fact look for a better one before I linked to it but I couldn't find one. I should make my own version one day...
- alexqgb 9y agoIt's not that representatives should isolated from all influence, just influence aside the electorate's.
- andrepd 9y agoI don't understand. What do you mean by this?
- mooreds 9y agoYes. I would call that the textbook definition of tyranny. For all the problems special interest lobbying brings, it's far better than the alternative.
- forapurpose 9y ago> we should be doing is insulating the government from outside influence. We should be insulating it from the influence of money, not of voters. The influence of voters is the foundation of democracy and legitimate government.
- 20after4 9y agoThis seems impossible as long as people love money it will be a powerful tool that can exert influence over politicians one way or another.
- forapurpose 9y agoOf course we can't do it perfectly. We can't eliminate murder either. But we can greatly reduce it.
- tomaskafka 9y agoThat would be any dictatorship government. How are they doing?
- pyrale 9y agoLet us try something impossible in order to avoid questioning our faith in corporations. In reality, it's impossible to build a thriving society on the expectation that no one should act morally. We should definitely hold our corporations accountable for being dodgy and exploit rather than report perceived problems.